The Future of Consumerist

Over the last twelve years, Consumerist has been a steadfast proponent and voice on behalf of consumers, from exposing shady practices by secretive cable companies to pushing for action against dodgy payday lenders. Now, we’re joining forces with Consumer Reports, our parent organization, to cultivate the next generation of consumer advocacy.

Stay tuned as Consumerist’s current and future content finds its home as a part of the Consumer Reports brand. In the meantime, you can access existing Consumerist content below, and we encourage you to visit Consumer Reports to read the latest consumer news.

Bad customer service stories don’t usually involve phrases like “bullet casings were recovered” and “drive-by shooting”. Alas, this one does.

On the night of April 14, 2007, Mr. Kenneth E. Cole (yes, really) of Midwest City, Oklahoma called a Papa John’s to order a pizza—a decision which triggered a series of events culminating in a Papa John’s Pizza Guy and his twin brother doing a drive by on Mr. Cole’s house (allegedly). It all started when Mr. Cole was treated rudely by the employee. Mr. Cole called back, complained to the manager, but didn’t feel satisfied with the conversation. Mr. Cole then called another Papa John’s and complained about the poor service at the first Papa John’s. Finally, Mr. Cole called the franchise headquarters and left a message requesting a return phone call. That’s when it started to get interesting.

From the complaint:

Immediately after calling defendant DCT Enterprises, plaintiff’s phone rang and plaintiff’s caller ID indicated that it was the first Papa John’s store. Plaintiff answered the phone and was immediately confronted by the first store employee plaintiff had spoken with earlier. The store employee, among other things, said:

a. He knew of plaintiff’s address and where plaintiff lived;

b.He also lived in plaintiff’s neighborhood;

c. He was a gang member belonging to the “Blood’s” gang;

d. He was going to “shoot up” the plaintiff’s house in a “drive by” shooting; and

e. He was going to kill everyone in plaintiff’s house.

4 days later, sure enough, someone DID “shoot up” the plaintiff’s house. From the complaint:

Four (4) days later, on Saturday, April 21, 2007, a drive by shooting occured at plaintiff’s home at approximately 11:30 p.m. At least four (4) bullets were fired at plaintiff’s house. Plaintiff’s car was struck by bullet, as was the car owned by plaintiff’s brother. Plaintiff, his minor children and plaintiff’s adult brother were all home at the time. Plaintiff immediately contacted the police who responded quickly. Four (4) bullet casings and one bullet were recovered from the scene.